Statement on behalf of CORE ISSUES TRUST

30 July 2014

In disallowing witnesses to be cross-examined and by ignoring both controversy about categorical notions of human sexuality (which the Royal College of Psychiatrists recently admitted are not fixed nor immutable,) and inconsistencies in Boris Johnson’s witness statements, Justice Lang has confirmed today that the British establishment is no longer a guardian of freedom of speech nor of conscience.

In what is believed to be a contrived and punitive judgement handed down in the High Court this afternoon, Justice Lang reduces to differences in “semantics” Mayor Boris Johnson’s intervention to halt the 2012 London Bus Campaign that Core Issues Trust, together with Anglican Mainstream mounted to counter an ongoing Stonewall campaign, and which he now both denies, but at the time was willing to be credited for as a Stonewall “hero”.

“This is a clear example of the UK judiciary aligning itself with powerful political forces and personalities that will brook no opposition to the view that children are born gay and have any choice in sexual preference, expression or identity” said Dr Mike Davidson, Director of Core Issues Trust.

“At no point in the extensive Mayoral pre-election media coverage capturing the bus campaign – except when a legal challenge was launched more recently - did Mr Johnson disavow the impression that the decision to pull our advertisement was his own rather than that of Transport for London, which he now insists. Our advert simply mirrored Stonewall’s in attesting that some individuals have left homosexuality and no longer identify as “gay”, despite once having done so. But this is an intolerable position for those bent on refusing dissention in this area, and for those courting their vote”, he said.

Counsel for Mr Johnson has refused to acknowledge that Core Issues Trust nowhere countenances, not even in its “Change Statement”, literature, incorporation or policy documents and statements, nor in its media contributions, a “medical model”: offering “cure” for “disease” in relation to homosexual feelings and practices. “Sexuality is not like a light switch which can be flipped on or off” the CIT Director said. “Boris’ lawyers, seemingly unopposed by Mrs Justice Lang, have inaccurately insisted that our campaign was in itself a promotion and advertisement for ‘gay cure’ therapy”.

Mrs Justice Lang has studiously avoided any opportunity to show respect for the rights, aspirations and conscience of a minority who refuse to accept the cruelty of being denied the right to a personal identity which is based on managing, reducing or where possible, eliminating homosexual feelings, with the help of organisations like Core Issues Trust. She has done so on the basis that Boris Johnson, a senior Conservative politician and designated future party leader considers holding such views, will ignite “persecution and prejudice” against gay persons in the city of London.

According to Dr Davidson “this apparently subservient judgement simply confirms how the ongoing, but dishonest determination of activists and those serving them, fuelled and supported by newspapers like the Guardian, manifested and orchestrated through “trial by twitter”, will accept neither dissent nor debate. The advance of the homosexual agenda in Great Britain has been propagated not on the valid rights of freedom of choice, but on the myth that homosexuality is an immutable category assigned at birth. Core Issues Trust supports freedom of choice and LGBT dignity but the campaign to promote homosexuality by the government, incrementally by the state church, and now the judiciary is ill-founded on notions of genetic determinism and is without uncontested scientific evidence. It will ultimately fail in Britain and in Europe not least because it is based on and propelled by a lie. Both Boris Johnson’s dishonestly, his party’s line and the tale his media officer told in court is quite consistent with this trend. I’m sorry Judge Lang has refused to distance herself from it”.

Useful links & resources

The Church House Interview

Should the Church of England ban 'Conversion Therapy'?

We're not smiling about this! Will the evangelical wing of the Church of England learn from Tim Farron's experieince? If conceding to Jayne Ozanne's demands or refusing to oppose her motion, they should prepare to change the historical Gospel teaching of the church on human sexuality. Will the church disregard the concerns of other- and no-faith groups outside of the Church of England,who do not accpet the normalisation of homosexual practice as a normal varient of human sexuality?